United States v. Parrish

- 1 -

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

CENTRAL DIVISION

(at Lexington)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAMAYLA PARRISH,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Criminal Action No. 5:25-CR-024-CHB-

MAS

ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION

TO ACCEPT GUILTY PLEA

*** *** *** *** After conducting proceedings under Rule 11, see [R. 29], United States Magistrate Judge Matthew A. Stinnett recommended that the undersigned accept Defendant Samayla Parrish's guilty plea and adjudge her guilty of Count 1 of the Indictment. Id. at 3. The magistrate judge informed Defendant of each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11 and determined that the conditional guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offenses. Id. at 1-2. The magistrate judge therefore recommended that the plea of guilty be accepted by the undersigned. Id. at 3. Judge Stinnett imposed a three-day deadline for any objection. Id. at 3. That deadline has passed, and neither the defendant nor the United States has objected.

The Court is not required to "review … a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings." Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985); see also United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981) (holding that a failure to file objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation waives the right to appellate review); Fed. R. Crim. P. 59(b)(2)-(3) (limiting de novo review duty to "any objection" filed); 28 U.S.C.